Lukas Jung
@lhdjung.bsky.social
2.2K followers 1.1K following 98 posts
R package developer – {scrutiny}, {unsum}, and more | https://github.com/lhdjung | #rstats | forensic metascience | error detection | missing value handling
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
lhdjung.bsky.social
Breaking: OSF finally got a proper download button.

@jamiecummins.bsky.social your prayers have been heard!
Screenshot of an OSF preprint page, now with a "Download preprint" button: https://osf.io/preprints/osf/zhm54_v1
lhdjung.bsky.social
So I read in a book that also portrayed a certain boisterous, loquacious statistics specialist.
lhdjung.bsky.social
You can run version$version.string to check, or packageVersion("base") if you only want the number.
lhdjung.bsky.social
Time had passed too, but I'm convinced language plays a role. Good writing is way easier in English than in German, at least.
lhdjung.bsky.social
I wrote my Bachelor's thesis in German, about a philosophical literature that was all in English. It was a pain, and the writing was not great. When I wrote my Master's in English, about a similar and partly overlapping English-only literature, it was much more enjoyable.
lhdjung.bsky.social
This can also be defined analogously to %in% itself:

`%not_in%` <- function(x, table) {
match(x, table, nomatch = 0L) == 0L
}

Note the == where %in% has >
lhdjung.bsky.social
Another win for nominative determinism
lhdjung.bsky.social
"Replicators could not be expected to guess what needs to be done in order to test and demonstrate a phenomenon [...]. Our view is that in science everything should be clearly specified and should not involve unspecified procedures and assumptions, or require implicit knowledge."
giladfeldman.bsky.social
Accepted for publication at Judgement and Decision Making:
"On process & value of direct close replications: Rejoinder to Shafir and Cheek (2024) commentary on Chandrashekar etal. (2021)"

Responding to original authors regarding our replication of Shafir (1993).

Details 👇🧵
lhdjung.bsky.social
I haven't had this issue, but you could try pak::pak() to install or update all packages required by your current project. The RStudio/Posit folks now recommend pak for package installation. pak.r-lib.org/reference/pa...
Install specified required packages — pak
Install the specified packages, or the ones required by the package or project in the current working directory.
pak.r-lib.org
lhdjung.bsky.social
The juxtaposition of science and "activism" is also a problem because the goal of all such activism is some vision of better science. By these standards, people are engaged in activism as opposed to science whenever they say, e.g., that more research is needed. Knowledge gain is always the point.
lhdjung.bsky.social
However, we might have different priors, so your mileage may vary. I'm honestly not prepared to go deep into the weeds as to what someone might or might not have thought about this term nearly a decade ago – hope you understand.
lhdjung.bsky.social
What I can say based on many of his blog posts and podcast episodes is that he is given to rhetorical flourish. I find it totally believable that he would say such a thing out of his "unending personal silliness" (again quoted from the post) and get contrite when people don't see it as a joke.
lhdjung.bsky.social
I can't speak for James, but he did own it in the blog post from seven years ago (!) that I linked. Some excerpts below. Regarding "why thug if not": In my reading, his explanation in the post makes perfect sense with the context being the riff on Fiske's piece.
lhdjung.bsky.social
Thanks for your perspective!
lhdjung.bsky.social
At least that is where Nick got it from: "The adventures of a self-appointed data police cadet" steamtraen.blogspot.com
lhdjung.bsky.social
Can you point me to some unironic usages of "data police"? I might not be on the same page. So far, I thought it was coined by Susan Fiske in this piece which was not exactly flattering to critics/reformers. www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/a-c...
lhdjung.bsky.social
The term "data police" was coined as a way to ridicule unspecified critics. Some reform-oriented people (I only know of one!) adopted it as a self-deprecating joke. See link above. I fear the OP blogpost takes these terms out of context. Cc @micefearboggis.bsky.social
lhdjung.bsky.social
For context, James disowned the term "data thug" after the Science piece came out – precisely because people started taking it seriously, which was never his intention! I haven't seen him use the term ever since that time, or anyone else.
jamesheathers.medium.com/hugs-shrugs-...
lhdjung.bsky.social
Here is an interview with Pearl where he describes his view of the differences between Rubin's potential outcomes framework and his own approach: causality.cs.ucla.edu/blog/index.p...
lhdjung.bsky.social
IIRC Pearl's view is there was some causal inference, but not enough, and especially not principled and decisive enough. He sees a lack of a clear distinction between causality and statistics, and a hesitation to embrace causality as something fundamentally different (ladder of causation).
lhdjung.bsky.social
Without suggesting that technical limitations are the main issue here, the max d setting can be adjusted (Cog icon > Slider > Max), although this may cut off part of the curve.